One-way and two-way wireless communications are a relatively well-understood area of endeavor. In many cases, various network elements comprise an infrastructure that supports the communications needs of one or more mobile stations. These communications needs can comprise voice calls, data communications, and so forth. In many cases, modern communications networks comprise a large number of geographically differentiated wireless access points that essentially define the network's edge. Such geographic differentiation, in turn, facilitates significant reuse of various network resources such as radio frequency bearer channels, control channels, time slots, spreading codes, and so forth. Aggressive reuse of such resources then facilitates viably supporting a relatively large user population.
Such communication networks, however, have become ever more complex. Pursuant to one approach, geographically parsed points of access couple to one another and to a plurality of mobility management agents (such as, but not limited to, Home Agents) that are hierarchically differentiated from those wireless access points and, in many cases, from each other as well. These coupled relationships serve to facilitate various mobility management functions such as, but not limited to:                Connected mode mobility (for example, handover of a presently communicating mobile station from one wireless access point to another);        Idle mode mobility (for example, supporting and effecting location updates for and/or paging of supported mobile stations);        Subscriber and call session management (for example, authentication, authorization, and accounting services, policy administration, and so forth);        Radio frequency resource management (for example, resource scheduling, admission control, dynamic quality of service management, load balancing, and so forth); to name but a few.        
Unfortunately, while such an architectural approach indeed successfully supports the intended service capability, there are issues of concern. For example, such proposals often tend to present significant scaling difficulties and barriers to feature growth and expansion. The end result represents increased costs (both for service providers and for subscribers) as pertain both to the infrastructure and to the mobile stations themselves, rapid obsolescence, and/or delayed expansion or upgrades with respect to capacity and/or features.
Skilled artisans will appreciate that elements in the figures are illustrated for simplicity and clarity and have not necessarily been drawn to scale. For example, the dimensions and/or relative positioning of some of the elements in the figures may be exaggerated relative to other elements to help to improve understanding of various embodiments of the present invention. Also, common but well-understood elements that are useful or necessary in a commercially feasible embodiment are often not depicted in order to facilitate a less obstructed view of these various embodiments of the present invention. It will further be appreciated that certain actions and/or steps may be described or depicted in a particular order of occurrence while those skilled in the art will understand that such specificity with respect to sequence is not actually required. It will also be understood that the terms and expressions used herein have the ordinary meaning as is accorded to such terms and expressions with respect to their corresponding respective areas of inquiry and study except where specific meanings have otherwise been set forth herein. For example, the expression “Internet Protocol” will be readily understood to refer generally to all presently existing and hereafter developed Internet protocols including, but not limited to, IPv4 and IPv6.